needs moderation: The response seems to be incomplete and does not follow the policy guidelines as it doesn't provide sufficient context or content to evaluate.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28591#pullrequestreview-3056829484
Complete

needs moderation: The link seems to come from an external site, and without context, there's a possibility of it being off-topic or unrelated to the discussion in the Bitcoin Core repository.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33015#issuecomment-3121553822
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4962760091500544?logs=ci#L1710

needs moderation: The comment uses the term "disimprovement," which could be seen as dismissive without providing specific technical reasons. It would be more useful to explain why keeping both checks is technically necessary.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33058#discussion_r2233250953
That’s a disimprovement. Please leave both, because the test failing on `res` being falsy indicates other issues than it failing on the weight check.

needs moderation: The comment "wow, this was a mess before :|" is not constructive criticism about the specific technical changes and could be seen as general criticism.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32430#discussion_r2233700291
wow, this was a mess before :|

needs moderation: The comment is off-topic, as it discusses a personal issue unrelated to the specific code changes or technical ideas presented.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33069#discussion_r2234123982
Hi need help my laptop was stollen and all i have is my cell phone from like the ice age do i need to download my core wallet to execute this

needs moderation: The comment contains language that dismisses another's input ("LLM blather"), which may be perceived as unprofessional and is not focusing on discussing specific technical ideas or decisions. It also speculates about others' motives in a dismissive manner.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33072#issuecomment-3125357027
This doesn't compile, and why not just saturate? e.g. if(nScore < std::max<int>)nScore++

"No performance impact (64-bit integers are efficient on modern systems)" sounds like LLM blather, the relevant criteria is not the performance of 64-bit integers considering how little it's used. Memory usage might matter if this was a per-peer (or per-block/header) field, but it isn't.

The purpose of it is to track input addresses to see that they were, in fact, reachable. I'm pretty sure that by
...

needs moderation: The comment includes an external link that may not be relevant to the Bitcoin Core discussion, which could be considered off-topic.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33077#issuecomment-3126634149
Tested it out over here: https://github.com/TheCharlatan/rust-bitcoinkernel/tree/monolithic_lib

needs moderation: The comment contains a long list of hash values and appears to lack context or discussion that connects it specifically to the topic at hand, which might be considered off-topic or potentially spammy.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33073#issuecomment-3126963884
My guix build with this change:

```
src/core/bitcoin on  codesign-source-epoch [$] via △ v3.31.6 via 🐍 v3.13.3 via ❄️ impure (nix-shell-env) took 1h33m13s
❯ find guix-build-$(git rev-parse --short=12 HEAD)/output/ -type f -print0 | env LC_ALL=C sort -z | xargs -r0 sha256sum
b8961023686b6aa3cef95f9f938c1c4b9c1e87945ea60c994dbe56c430faf43e guix-build-1bed0f734b3f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
90f9c040b2640cc7840cdb9341170c754b107ef7c681c762e8d69e3641378322 guix-build-1bed0f7
...

needs moderation: Without the specific content of the comment, it's unclear if it adheres to the policy. Comments must be evaluated on their own content to ensure they meet the guidelines.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33081
Ref: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32862#issuecomment-3114706601.

needs moderation: The comment contains the term "They can't" without clarity on who "they" refers to, which might be vague or lead to personal assumptions. It's important to maintain clear, constructive feedback focused on the technical aspect.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#discussion_r2237265558
They can't, we return `nullptr`. The failure branch needs to include `delete block` (or alternatively, as suggested, just instantiate `block` as a `std::unique_ptr` and then promote it to `shared_ptr` if reading succeeds.

needs moderation: The comment suggests missing tests for a part of the code, which is a valid point for improvement. However, stating ":(" could be seen as less professional or potentially negative. It is better to maintain a more neutral tone.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#discussion_r2237313429
Right, there is also no test for this :(. Will fix and add a test.

Needs moderation: This prompt appears to be spam, as it contains repeated mentions of a recovery service with contact details, which is not relevant to a feature request or discussion on the Bitcoin Core GitHub repository.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33089
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.

I am Mel Raassina, an Australian citizen. I am recounting my ordeal in the hopes of preventing others from becoming victims of crypto investment fraud. A few months ago, I was ensnared by a deceptive crypto investment scheme connected to a brokerage firm. I had made a substantial investment when Bitcoin prices were appreciating, believing it to be a sound venture. Regrettably, I was defrauded of AUD 420,000, and the broker subsequently bl
...

needs moderation: The comment "ghost nit" is unclear and does not provide any constructive feedback or context related to the code changes. It does not align with the policy of maintaining a professional tone or offering pointed criticism on technical ideas.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33005#discussion_r2240139278
ghost nit

needs moderation: The comment seems to reference an implementation that could be off-topic for the Bitcoin Core repository, unless it clearly relates to Bitcoin Core functionality. The comment needs clarification on its relevance to Bitcoin Core.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33091
implementation of circle pay

<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test impro
...

needs moderation: The prompt contains potentially spammy content with two PDF links labeled "free.pdf," which could be irrelevant to the discussion.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33092
<!--
*** Please remove the following help
[free.pdf](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/21497432/free.pdf)
[free.pdf](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/21497438/free.pdf)
text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain ho
...

needs moderation: The comment lacks context, making it unclear whether it is on-topic or maintain a professional tone. Additional information is required to assess its relevance and adherence to the discussion guidelines.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33095#issuecomment-3135184921
Hmm, let's just do it in the other pull.

needs moderation: The comment is unclear and lacks context, making it difficult to determine whether it's on-topic or constructive.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32989#discussion_r2242286183
Will get with the above if I re-touch

needs moderation: The prompt includes a link to a specific CI log without any accompanying comment or context, which might be off-topic or irrelevant without further explanation.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33096#issuecomment-3136793717
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5410514727075840?logs=ci#L1549

needs moderation: The comment should maintain a professional tone and refrain from self-deprecating language like "I was stupid.":
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33071#issuecomment-3138312655
I marked it closed cause I was stupid. I did mean block 8 but looking up by address doesn't work for coinbase one has to look up by pk

needs moderation: The comment appears to be off-topic as it discusses monetary values and an economic index rather than focusing on technical ideas or code-related topics relevant to the repository.:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3139456269
> It's the USD that has fallen, Bitcoin has remained more or less the same.

This is clearly not true. If you compute the Big Mac Index for Bitcoin and USD,
Bitcoin has clearly made enormous gains over the time period in question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index